click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121006
20121014
STATION
MSNBC 4
MSNBCW 4
CNN 2
CNNW 2
CSPAN 2
CSPAN2 1
FBC 1
KGO (ABC) 1
WJLA 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
assad goes, there will be a legitimate government that follows on. all of the loose talk of my friend, gov. romney and the congressman, about how we could do so much more. what more would they do other than put american boots on the ground? the last thing america needs is to get into in the ground war in the middle east requiring a hundred thousand american forces. they are the facts. every time the american -- every time the governor is asked about this, he goes up with a whole lot of the verbiage. when he gets pressed, he says he would not do anything different that we are doing now. are they proposing putting american troops until the ground? they should speak up and say so. that is not what they are saying. we are doing it exactly like we need to do to identify those forces who in fact will provide for stable government and not cause a regional suni shiite war when assad falls. >> nobody is proposing sending american troops to syria. we would not refer to asad as a reformer when he is killing his of civilians. we would not be outsourcing our foreign policy to the united nations gi
attacking their people. we should not have called bashar assad a reformer when he was turning his russian-provided guns on his own people. we should always stand up for peace, for democracy, for individual rights. and we should not be imposing these devastating defense cuts because what that does, when we equivocate on our values, when we show -- >> am i going to get anything to say here? >> it projects weakness, when we look weak, our adversaries are able to attack us -- >> that's a bunch of mularkey. >> why is that so? >> not a single thing he said is accurate. >> be specific. >> i will. number one, this lecture on embassy security. the congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for. number one. so much for the embassy security piece. number two, governor romney, before he knew the facts, before he even knew that our ambassador w killed, he was making a political statement, which was panned by the media around the world. and this talk about this weakness -- i don't understand what my friend's talking about. we -- this is a president who has g
, when the mullas in iran war attacking their people. we should not have called assad a reformer when he was turning russian provided guns on his own people. we should always stand up for peace, democracy and individual rights and not be imposing these devastating defense cuts. because what that does, when we show -- when we look weak, our enemies are much more willing to test us. and our allies are -- >> with all due respect, that's a bunch of malarkey. >> why is that so? >> nothing he said is accurate. >> be specific. >> i will be very specific. number one, this lecture on embassy security. the congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for. number one. so much for the embassy security piece. number two, governor romney, before he knew the facts, before he knew that our ambassador was killed, he was out making a political statement, which was panned by the media around the world. and this talk about this weakness. i don't understand what my friend is talking about here. this is a president who has gone out and done everything he had said he
has been calling syrian dictator bashar assad a, quote, reformer. now, earlier today the romney/ryan spokeswoman was asked about that claim. take a listen to this. >> the associated press did a fact check andrea and says that nobody in the administration ever called bashar assad a reformer, that that was characterized -- >> that's inaccurate. >> okay. then they say -- >> that's inaccurate. hillary clinton was the one who called assad a reformer. paul ryan was correct when he said that. >> okay. now, hold your horses for a second. we went back and found that secretary clinton actually said and she does not call mr. assad a reformer. to suggest otherwise is a complete distortion. she's actually referring to other senators who went over who described him as such. so that was an outright lie, but i guess the spokeswoman has now been affected by the same disease. we lie about our marathon times, we lie about gm motors and the factory, and then we lie about what the secretary of state says. that's just the norm now, is it? >> and we clech our pearls about how mean and nasty the democr
and not call assad a reformer when he was turning guns on his own people. we should always stand up for peace, for democracy, for individual rights. we should not be imposing these devastating defense cuts because what that does when we equivocate on our values, when we show we are slowing our defense, shows weakness. when we with weak, adversaries attack us and -- biden: with all do respect. that's a bunch of molarky. nothing you said is accurate. >> moderator: be specific. biden: i will be very specific. number of one, the lecture on embassy security, the congressman here cut the budget by $300 million below what we asked for. number one. so much for the embassy security piece. number two, governor romney, before he knew the facts, before he even knew our ambassador was killed was out making a political statement which was panned by the media around the world, and this talk about this -- this weakness, i don't understand what my phren's talking about here. this is a president who went out and has done everything he said he was going to do, a guy who repaired alliances so the rest of the wor
do things differently? we wouldn't refer to bashar al assad as a reformer when he's killing his own civilians with his russian provided weapons. we wouldn't be outsourcing our foreign policy to the united states giving vladimir putin veto power over our efforts to try and deal with this issue. >> cnn international's hala gorani with me again after this debate. i got goose bumps or chills when martha raddatz said what if bashar al assad doesn't go away, but they both agree no boots on the ground in syria. >> looking back and not looking forward. paul ryan is talking about what potentially a romney/ryan ticket would have done differently if they had been in charge, identify rebel groups, identify freedom fighters, perhaps help those that the united states might want to push forward as far as the future leadership of syria is concerned a little bit earlier than the obama administration has. but as far as plans for what happens from this point on, no. and there is no appetite from the united states or quite frankly any country in the western world for boots on the ground in syria. as we
,000 men, women, and children have been massacred by the assad regime over the past 20 months. violent extremists are flowing into the fight. our ally turkey has been attacked. the conflict threatens stability in the region. america can take pride in the blows that our military and intelligence professionals have inflicted on al qaeda, pakistan, afghanistan, including the killing of osama bin laden. these are real achievements one at a high cost. al qaeda remains a strong force, however, in yemen and somalia, libya, other parts of north africa, iraq, and now in syria, and other extremists have been ground across the region. drones and modern instruments of war are important tools in our fight, but are no substitute for national security strategy for the middle east. the president is fond of saying that the tide of war is receding. i want to believe him as much as anyone else. but when we look at the middle east today, with iran closer than ever to nuclear weapons capability, with the conflict in syria threatening to destabilize the region, and with a violent extremists on the march, an
there's any desire to get into a proxy war. >> indeed. michael, the president urges assad to step down. he supports arab efforts in their opposition to the syrian government. given the instability of libya and egypt, isn't the president's cautious approach to syria the right one unless, and i repeat, unless we want to get involved in another war? >> hi, martin. well, to be honest with you, i think there is a fairly narrow range of disagreement between the two men here because, as you know, if we think about this kind of a war and we think of all of our range of possible interventions, providing or asking our allies to provide a few more weapons is a relatively modest step along the spectrum. we're not talking about american planes creating a no-fly zone in the romney speech. we're not talking about creation of any kind of a humanitarian protected ground zone up in the north -- >> but, michael, i'm sorry to interrupt you, mike, but we wouldn't expect any details from this man because he never gives us any. t the overarching theme is he wants a new approach. not the approach being expedi
's pursuit of the nuclear weapon and assad willingness to shoot down rebels. romney took that on directly. >> steve: here is the response to rom romm's. president obama has shown he is tough and responsible and steady commander-in-chief. mitt romney shows he would be the exact opposite. behind the tough talk he is erratic and unsteady and irresponsible on his audition in the world stage. would you agree with that. >> of course not. they can say over and over again. especially when romney talks about not setting a time limit. >> brian: let me bring you to afghanistan real quick before we run out of time. a reporter came out in a speech in washington and said the administration has been lying and there is a narrative coming out of the washington that is nonsense. she got out of afghanistan like you d and she said the taliban is gaining strength and we are not told the truth. that is a farrah phrase for word and that is her position. is it yours. >> the taliban is gaining strength and there is a narrative from administration. i want the narrative to be progress in afghanistan especially with
, the 13% alawite population that affiliates itself with the assad regime. what do you them will happen to them? do you think it can be foreseen if we decide to intervene in this changing government? >> thank you. and can you just send the mic. there we go. >> yes. . >> please identify yourself. [inaudible] from the american university of bay root. i want to ask -- [inaudible] that the 75% of what is -- [inaudible] the islamist party is not because islamic party because in egypt for 17 years not political parties. so the islamic party became more political. [inaudible] in to the system the political system. it's more political than islamic. and for hisham melhem mohammad -- what happened during the demonstration in egypt. he was in the -- [inaudible] visit to the european union in brussels and immediately said i'm against that -- [inaudible] but also we don't accept in cairo the frustration to attack the property, the diplomatic -- [inaudible] and i'm sorry against it . >>caller: pop. >> enact a law to stop the abuse of the free speech against other religions. >> okay. >> so a question
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)